Search Alberta Purchasing Connection opportunities from Alberta public-sector buyers.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum results (default 10, max 50) | |
| status | No | APC status code (default OPEN) | OPEN |
| category | No | Optional category: services, goods, or construction | |
| keywords | No | Search words or phrase |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that the tool searches opportunities but reveals no behavioral traits like read-only nature, pagination behavior, or any special constraints (e.g., date range limitations).
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and concise, though it could include more context without becoming verbose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no annotations, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return format, how results are ordered, or how this tool differs from similar ones like 'find_alberta_opportunities' or 'search_opportunities'. The description lacks completeness for effective use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, where each parameter has a description. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it only mentions 'opportunities'. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameters adequately.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly identifies the tool's purpose: searching Alberta Purchasing Connection opportunities from Alberta public-sector buyers. The verb 'Search' and specific resource are stated, but it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'find_alberta_opportunities' or 'search_opportunities'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives such as 'find_alberta_opportunities' or 'find_opportunities', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
